Case 2304962/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Johnson v Callacab (UK) Ltd (in liquidation) and 4 others — 2023
- Case reference
- 2304962/2020
- Decision date
- 31 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin Representation
Parties
6 namedClaimant
Miss L Johnson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 31 January 2023 Employment Judge Martin, sitting by CVP, entered judgment under Rule 21 after the second, third and fourth respondents failed to present a response within the stipulated time. The order records that the claim succeeds and that the claimant's remedy will be determined at a one-day remedy hearing listed for 28 March 2023 at 10:00 am.
This short judgment does not set out separate liability reasons, does not distinguish between the pleaded heads of claim, and does not quantify any award. It records only that the default judgment was made against respondents 2 to 4; the operative order does not include respondent 1.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Whistleblowing | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21, Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.